Home » Archived » Buckminster » Best way to include launchers in an RCP build
|
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #479491 is a reply to message #479482] |
Tue, 11 August 2009 10:25 |
|
Hi Tas,
Tas Frangoullides wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Following the mailapp tutorial I've noticed that the
> org.eclipse.equinox.executable needs to be included in the product
> feature so that launchers are included when the product is created. You
> don't need to do this when using the PDE build
That's actually a modified truth. If your objective is to create a repository from with the application can be installed
onto more then one platform, then you must have the executable feature. If you don't, you can only create the
application for the same platform as the one you're currently building from.
> and you actually get a
> different product in terms of installed features. Also there is the bug
> relating to icons. Is there a way to arrange the features or build so
> that both PDE and Buckminster produce identical results?
>
Not at present. There's a bug in how the launcher is branded and my guess (unverified) is that the PDE build somehow
cheats at the end to work around that bug. I haven't found any way to create the correct meta-data just yet. At present,
you'll get two launchers every time. We're working on that.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
|
|
| |
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #479829 is a reply to message #479499] |
Wed, 12 August 2009 16:12 |
Tas Frangoullides Messages: 195 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Thomas,
I've been looking for a suitable workaround and failed. Instead I've
uncovered more differences between buckminster and PDE. The most difficult
is that products installed from sites created using buckminster don't run.
The following error is found in the log.
!ENTRY org.eclipse.osgi 4 0 2009-08-12 16:46:39.875
!MESSAGE Application error
!STACK 1
java.lang.IllegalStateException: Unable to acquire application service.
Ensure that the org.eclipse.core.runtime bundle is resolved and started (see
config.ini).
at
org.eclipse.core.runtime.internal.adaptor.EclipseAppLauncher .start(EclipseAppLauncher.java:74)
at
org.eclipse.core.runtime.adaptor.EclipseStarter.run(EclipseS tarter.java:368)
at
org.eclipse.core.runtime.adaptor.EclipseStarter.run(EclipseS tarter.java:179)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown Source)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Unknown Source)
at org.eclipse.equinox.launcher.Main.invokeFramework(Main.java: 559)
at org.eclipse.equinox.launcher.Main.basicRun(Main.java:514)
at org.eclipse.equinox.launcher.Main.run(Main.java:1311)
If I add the application plug-in to the configuration tab of the product
configuration the product works. What's happening here? Is PDE adding some
configuration by default?
Also, looking at the issue of having to include the executables feature, it
has another unpleasant side effect of making the feature available in the
resulting p2 repository which I don't want.
I really want to have a buckminster build which can produce similar results
from the same source currently processed by a PDE build. I think many people
migrating from PDE Build to buckminster will want this.
To workaround these issues I am having to consider using buckminster only
for materializing the target platform and fetching the source and then
handing things over to PDE Build for to create the p2 repository. However I
would lose the revision based qualifier substitution which I find very
useful. Any suggestions as to how I can work around would be greatly
appreciate. Maybe it's easier to help resolve these problem in buckminster?
Thanks,
Tas
"Tas Frangoullides" <tfrangoullides@model-driven.co.uk> wrote in message
news:h5rie3$p6f$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hi Thomas,
>
>>>
>>> Following the mailapp tutorial I've noticed that the
>>> org.eclipse.equinox.executable needs to be included in the product
>>> feature so that launchers are included when the product is created. You
>>> don't need to do this when using the PDE build
>>
>> That's actually a modified truth. If your objective is to create a
>> repository from with the application can be installed onto more then one
>> platform, then you must have the executable feature. If you don't, you
>> can only create the application for the same platform as the one you're
>> currently building from.
>
> This is what I really like about the approach supported by buckminster of
> creating a multi-platform site first. Is there a way to have the feature
> included in the site but not the installed product. I tried creating a
> site feature and moved the executables feature into that but this didn't
> work.
>
>>> and you actually get a different product in terms of installed features.
>>> Also there is the bug relating to icons. Is there a way to arrange the
>>> features or build so that both PDE and Buckminster produce identical
>>> results?
>>>
>> Not at present. There's a bug in how the launcher is branded and my guess
>> (unverified) is that the PDE build somehow cheats at the end to work
>> around that bug. I haven't found any way to create the correct meta-data
>> just yet. At present, you'll get two launchers every time. We're working
>> on that.
>
> Fair enough. I'll just find ways to work around this in my build, maybe
> looking into how PDE gets round them is a good starting point.
>
> Thanks,
> Tas
>
>
|
|
|
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #479839 is a reply to message #479829] |
Wed, 12 August 2009 16:40 |
|
Hi Tas,
On 08/12/2009 06:12 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
> stuff deleted...
>
> If I add the application plug-in to the configuration tab of the product
> configuration the product works. What's happening here? Is PDE adding
> some configuration by default?
>
Not sure what you're saying here. Are you trying to build a product without including the plug-in that defines the
application, and that fails with Buckminster but works with PDE-build?
If that's the case, I'd consider it a bug in PDE-build rather then a bug in Buckminster. The general rule is that all
bundles necessary to run the application must be present either in the product configuration or in a feature that the
configuration is referencing. Why would the application bundle be exempt from that rule?
> Also, looking at the issue of having to include the executables feature,
> it has another unpleasant side effect of making the feature available in
> the resulting p2 repository which I don't want.
>
Can you please file a bugzilla for this? The equinox executable feature is not intended for runtimes. It's to be
considered a pure build-time feature and the inclusion of it should be necessary.
> I really want to have a buckminster build which can produce similar
> results from the same source currently processed by a PDE build. I think
> many people migrating from PDE Build to buckminster will want this.
>
> To workaround these issues I am having to consider using buckminster
> only for materializing the target platform and fetching the source and
> then handing things over to PDE Build for to create the p2 repository.
> However I would lose the revision based qualifier substitution which I
> find very useful. Any suggestions as to how I can work around would be
> greatly appreciate. Maybe it's easier to help resolve these problem in
> buckminster?
>
I agree that this can be improved and as I said earlier, we're working on it. Please set the priority on the bugzilla to
major and stay tuned :-)
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
|
|
| |
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #479865 is a reply to message #479841] |
Wed, 12 August 2009 18:51 |
|
Hi Tas,
On 08/12/2009 07:04 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>> Can you please file a bugzilla for this? The equinox executable
>> feature is not intended for runtimes. It's to be considered a pure
>> build-time feature and the inclusion of it should be necessary.
>
> I assume you mean shoudln't?
Doh, yes of course.
> I have filed a bug https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=286413
>
Thanks.
> Do you already have a bug for ensuring that given the same source
> buckminster and PDE Build produce comparable results? I can't find one.
> Should I open one?
>
Sure, why not. Add an umbrella bugzilla for everything related to the diff and then add 286413 as a "Depends on" to that
bug since that's one of the things that needs to be addressed.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
|
|
| | | | |
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #480514 is a reply to message #480500] |
Mon, 17 August 2009 13:10 |
|
Yes, that's correct. THe last minute fix for the case where the executable feature is not present has not been uploaded yet.
- thomas
On 08/17/2009 02:28 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Can you please confirm the URL is correct? I'm only seeing up to
> 1.1.350.r10510.
>
> Thanks,
> Tas
>
> "Thomas Hallgren" <thomas@tada.se> wrote in message
> news:h635v1$cat$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> On 08/14/2009 10:01 AM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>>> Hi Thomas
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>>>>> Can you please file a bugzilla for this? The equinox executable
>>>>>>> feature is not intended for runtimes. It's to be considered a pure
>>>>>>> build-time feature and the inclusion of it should be necessary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I assume you mean shoudln't?
>>>>> Doh, yes of course.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have filed a bug
>>>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=286413
>>>>>>
>>>
>>> I noticed you have already fixed it. That's great! Is there a build I
>>> can consume to test the fix?
>>>
>> Yes, I published new stuff to
>> http://download.eclipse.org/tools/buckminster/updates-3.5 yesterday
>> evening.
>>
>> - thomas
>
|
|
|
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #480570 is a reply to message #480514] |
Mon, 17 August 2009 16:32 |
|
I just uploaded the latest stuff to our update sites. It should be available on all mirrors within an hour or so.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
On 08/17/2009 03:10 PM, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Yes, that's correct. THe last minute fix for the case where the
> executable feature is not present has not been uploaded yet.
>
>
> - thomas
>
> On 08/17/2009 02:28 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> Can you please confirm the URL is correct? I'm only seeing up to
>> 1.1.350.r10510.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tas
>>
>> "Thomas Hallgren" <thomas@tada.se> wrote in message
>> news:h635v1$cat$1@build.eclipse.org...
>>> On 08/14/2009 10:01 AM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>>>> Hi Thomas
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>> Can you please file a bugzilla for this? The equinox executable
>>>>>>>> feature is not intended for runtimes. It's to be considered a pure
>>>>>>>> build-time feature and the inclusion of it should be necessary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I assume you mean shoudln't?
>>>>>> Doh, yes of course.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have filed a bug
>>>>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=286413
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I noticed you have already fixed it. That's great! Is there a build I
>>>> can consume to test the fix?
>>>>
>>> Yes, I published new stuff to
>>> http://download.eclipse.org/tools/buckminster/updates-3.5 yesterday
>>> evening.
>>>
>>> - thomas
>>
>
|
|
|
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #480717 is a reply to message #480570] |
Tue, 18 August 2009 09:54 |
Tas Frangoullides Messages: 195 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Thomas,
Which fixes does this include? I've updated my install and tried some things
but some of the bugs are still there.
The following bug seem to be fixed
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=286413 Launcher is not
included in RCP Product
I've tested the following with my own code and with the code submitted by
Johannes and it doesn't seem to be fixed.
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=280721 Missing Launcher Icon
I haven't fully tested this one but on the surface it doesn't seem to be
fixed either.
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=286413 Buckminster does not
generate default start levels as PDE...
Thanks,
Tas.
"Thomas Hallgren" <thomas@tada.se> wrote in message
news:h6c0ms$ln7$1@build.eclipse.org...
>I just uploaded the latest stuff to our update sites. It should be
>available on all mirrors within an hour or so.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas Hallgren
>
>
> On 08/17/2009 03:10 PM, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
>> Yes, that's correct. THe last minute fix for the case where the
>> executable feature is not present has not been uploaded yet.
>>
>>
>> - thomas
>>
>> On 08/17/2009 02:28 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>
>>> Can you please confirm the URL is correct? I'm only seeing up to
>>> 1.1.350.r10510.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tas
>>>
>>> "Thomas Hallgren" <thomas@tada.se> wrote in message
>>> news:h635v1$cat$1@build.eclipse.org...
>>>> On 08/14/2009 10:01 AM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>>>>> Hi Thomas
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>> Can you please file a bugzilla for this? The equinox executable
>>>>>>>>> feature is not intended for runtimes. It's to be considered a pure
>>>>>>>>> build-time feature and the inclusion of it should be necessary.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I assume you mean shoudln't?
>>>>>>> Doh, yes of course.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have filed a bug
>>>>>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=286413
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed you have already fixed it. That's great! Is there a build I
>>>>> can consume to test the fix?
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, I published new stuff to
>>>> http://download.eclipse.org/tools/buckminster/updates-3.5 yesterday
>>>> evening.
>>>>
>>>> - thomas
>>>
>>
>
|
|
| |
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #480723 is a reply to message #480718] |
Tue, 18 August 2009 10:23 |
Tas Frangoullides Messages: 195 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Thomas,
I was testing by invoking site.p2 from the IDE, with no additional
properties, so the site that is built is win32,x86 only. I've tried using *
when building the site which also works.
I am using the p2 director application to install the product and test if it
launches.
Thanks,
Tas
"Thomas Hallgren" <thomas@tada.se> wrote in message
news:h6du7c$a1n$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hi Tas,
> What settings do you use for target.os, target.ws, and target.arch? You
> cannot have them set to '*' when building a product. Could that be the
> case here? I get both the Launcher Icon and the start levels.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas Hallgren
>
>
> On 08/18/2009 11:54 AM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> Which fixes does this include? I've updated my install and tried some
>> things but some of the bugs are still there.
>>
>> The following bug seem to be fixed
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=286413 Launcher is not
>> included in RCP Product
>>
>> I've tested the following with my own code and with the code submitted
>> by Johannes and it doesn't seem to be fixed.
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=280721 Missing Launcher
>> Icon
>>
>> I haven't fully tested this one but on the surface it doesn't seem to be
>> fixed either.
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=286413 Buckminster does
>> not generate default start levels as PDE...
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tas.
|
|
|
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #480729 is a reply to message #480723] |
Tue, 18 August 2009 10:45 |
|
Would it be possible for me to have a look at the generated content.jar?
- thomas
On 08/18/2009 12:23 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> I was testing by invoking site.p2 from the IDE, with no additional
> properties, so the site that is built is win32,x86 only. I've tried
> using * when building the site which also works.
>
> I am using the p2 director application to install the product and test
> if it launches.
>
> Thanks,
> Tas
|
|
| |
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #480742 is a reply to message #480735] |
Tue, 18 August 2009 11:25 |
|
Very odd. What version do you currently have of the org.eclipse.buckminster.pde.feature ?
- thomas
On 08/18/2009 01:05 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
> Here it is.
>
> Thanks,
> Tas
>
>
>
>
> "Thomas Hallgren" <thomas@tada.se> wrote in message
> news:h6e0p6$9v9$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> Would it be possible for me to have a look at the generated content.jar?
>>
>> - thomas
>>
>> On 08/18/2009 12:23 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>
>>> I was testing by invoking site.p2 from the IDE, with no additional
>>> properties, so the site that is built is win32,x86 only. I've tried
>>> using * when building the site which also works.
>>>
>>> I am using the p2 director application to install the product and test
>>> if it launches.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tas
|
|
|
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #480752 is a reply to message #480742] |
Tue, 18 August 2009 12:11 |
Tas Frangoullides Messages: 195 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Thomas,
Sorry my mistake. I took an update at 7pm last night and believed it to be
the latest but it was r10512. I ran another update now and picked up r10522.
Everything appears to work.
Thanks for the very quick turn around on these bugs. Aside from making it
possible to migrate builds it makes writing my buckminster tutorial a bit
easier :)
What is your process for closing off bugs? Do you want me to mark the bug as
VERIFIED in bugzilla?
Thanks,
Tas
"Thomas Hallgren" <thomas@tada.se> wrote in message
news:h6e33u$3ka$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Very odd. What version do you currently have of the
> org.eclipse.buckminster.pde.feature ?
>
> - thomas
>
> On 08/18/2009 01:05 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>> Here it is.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tas
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Thomas Hallgren" <thomas@tada.se> wrote in message
>> news:h6e0p6$9v9$1@build.eclipse.org...
>>> Would it be possible for me to have a look at the generated content.jar?
>>>
>>> - thomas
>>>
>>> On 08/18/2009 12:23 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>
>>>> I was testing by invoking site.p2 from the IDE, with no additional
>>>> properties, so the site that is built is win32,x86 only. I've tried
>>>> using * when building the site which also works.
>>>>
>>>> I am using the p2 director application to install the product and test
>>>> if it launches.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Tas
>
|
|
|
Re: Best way to include launchers in an RCP build [message #480767 is a reply to message #480752] |
Tue, 18 August 2009 12:42 |
|
On 08/18/2009 02:11 PM, Tas Frangoullides wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Sorry my mistake. I took an update at 7pm last night and believed it to
> be the latest but it was r10512. I ran another update now and picked up
> r10522. Everything appears to work.
>
Ah, great.
> Thanks for the very quick turn around on these bugs. Aside from making
> it possible to migrate builds it makes writing my buckminster tutorial a
> bit easier :)
>
Looking forward to that. Tutorials are much wanted.
> What is your process for closing off bugs? Do you want me to mark the
> bug as VERIFIED in bugzilla?
>
We havent' really established a formal process that goes beyond the "Fixed" phase yet but marking them as verified is a
good thing I think. So by all means, please do that.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Feb 05 15:57:54 GMT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04446 seconds
|